Recent Posts
In an exclusive - noted many months ago - Cinematrix brought you the first glimpses both textual and photographic of Aussie actress playing folk god Bob Dylan in a new movie biopic.
Well, readers, she unveiled similar plans at the Venice Film Festival earlier this week, under the title "I'm Not There", directed by Todd Haynes (Velvet Goldmine). The premiere featured other Hollywood heavyweights lending contributions to Dylan throughout distinct parts of his life. These include Richard Gere, Christian Bale and Heath Ledger.
However, it was our very own Cate whose performance stole the show apparently.
"Critics agree... Blanchett is the most convincing, her appearance transformed by wig and dark glasses and her walk and speaking voice almost uncannily like the original's." (www.smh.com.au)
How very odd, you may think. A talented female actress playing an iconic but mysterious male music legend. Seemingly, it's either an ode to the talents of each exclusively, or one that somehow showcases both of their abilities to surpass conventional gender stereotyping. Furthermore, it works. Well.
Could this start a new trend of gender-swapping portrayls in cinema? Reminscent of Virginia Wolf's book "Orlando" and Hilary Swanks masquerade as a young male in a small predjudiced American town in "Boys Don't Cry", we may be watching the tip of an iceberg about to emerge into more feature films on gender as irrespective to character.
After all, it is about representation, right?
Tricks, sleight-of-hand and illusions – is it science coloured with flashy entertainment or a shady art of deceiving and subterfuge? The Prestiege poses this question and more with a deeply psychological edge examining the motivations as to why one would embark into a discipline of manipulations. Within this dichotmoy, are of course the magicians or performers and then there’s the rest of us. The audience. We either feign understanding or concoct reasoning to propose how the act is realized or we simply watch in bewilderment. Most, however, are left unsure.
Christopher Nolan, the man behind Memento and Batman Begins offers another thrilling tale of mystery in a dark and unsafe world. Vividly portrayed behind the backdrop of a pre-industrial London, where Thomas Edison and Nikola Tesla race to build artificial light. So too does Robert Angier (played by Hugh Jackman) and Alfred Borden (Christian Bale) fight in a deadly game of one-up-man-ship to have the best magic tricks and largest crowds. It’s this premise of a world caught between the archways of the developing science of tomorrow and the intrigue of the unexplainable that yesterday feared.
This setting in particular adds to the depth and composition of the film which relies on suspending your disbelief through either stylings, narrative or both. If each trick wasn't explained by a 'behind the scenes' encounter after the show I'd simply call it magic. But, when one trick goes horribly wrong, it sets the stage for a malicious antagonism between two rivals that were merely friendly competitors. Through this rage, each actor intends to learn the others tricks to undermine each and every show of the other. This also extends to physical harming one another.
Make no mistake, the film is a thriller with more twists than a labyrinth, more catches thans a pyramid scheme sold by a former used car salesman. Also of note are the contributions of supporting roles played by Michael Caine and David Bowie that give extra credibility to this tale. Hugh Jackman is astonishingly good and holds his own against counterpart Christian Bale inhibited by an English accent. Additionally, the underrated Scarlett Johansson gives a sufficient performance as well. Be warned however, you have to concentrate closely to get the most from this film but the rewards are an engrossing tale that will have you thinking about it afterwards. Satisfying, enjoyable and dark; this breathes new life into a forgotten genre of perilous machinations, struggle and a forboding sense of losing it all.
Cutter: "Obsession, is a young mans game."
4 starz
Pictures:
impawards.com
pleasetakenote.com
echonews.com
If film is simply escapism why do we watch war films?
Additionally if watching a movie is to relax or 'chill out' how can widespread violence be comforting. Unless you're a homicidal masochist, this genre of film doesn't apply to the usual standards. However, these are the two most popular responses to reason watching a film, e.g. escapism and to relax. For the majority who have experienced war they'd want nothing more than to evade war films that seemingly glorify genocide, misguided patriotism or bodily aggression against another. For the rest of us, why selectively watch war films to endure a type of portrayed torture on-screen?
Admittedly there are many types of war films that can be segregated and categorised, due or based on historical fact, fiction and to scales of local, national and international magnitude. Wars can be between countries or groups of religious, governmental or daresay 'ideological', persuasions. There can be sociological wars fraught between members of ethnicity, gender, sex, class and race that may underpin warring relations among thinkers, or similar feelings towards 'actors' that take up arms. For a more traditional context we could see them (depending on your persuasion) as freedom fighters, dissenters, liberators, government militia, defense forces or more cohesively as soldiers. So if there's such an assortment of wars and inclusively war films can they still be viewed under an all-encompassiong banner of promoting the visual stimulation of oppression, struggle and pain?
Just today I hired out "Flags of our Fathers". Having not yet seen it I know very little other than it looks a) American-made b) concerned with an American war/battle c) probably pro-American. Glimpsing at the cover I saw Clint Eastwood had something to do with producing it, either directing or as a financier. I presume he's too old to be thrown into the action of a war film and plus, he's done his fair share in westerns over the years. Yet, I put it to you (Orble reader or the broader outer community), I chose this particular movie over all other 'new releases' for something quite contrary to escapism or relaxing. I wanted something real. I didn't fancy a war film like that of modern horrors of werewolves vs vampires (Underworld) or even half-bloods vs vampires (Blade/s). Similarly something like a Hellenic version wouldn't do either (See: Gladiator, 300). Nor, a war against the capitalist society (The Corporation, Supersize Me) or one on global warming (An Inconvenient Truth) or even one on speech (F*ck).
I wanted something real. Moreover, something relative to my life had I been born less than 70 years ago and could reasonably imagine the circumstances surrounding this un-enviable position. Usually I admire stories of hardship against odds - it's where the greatest victory lays. Things done simply net the least rewards. Sometimes bearing a grimace, flinching at the starkness or feeling dour at the event to transpire makes me feel an uneasiness that I never would have encountered otherwise and for that I'm glad. Not that I'm advocating war but the grounding principles therein are of perseverence, stamina, resolution and qualitatively, 'action', are found in their most rawest forms. No one leads by complacency and therefore none will follow. War films are arguably the best source to find the most savage, honest and brutal depictions of human nature. You may say they are the worst of human emotions but nevertheless they are real. The only lies are found in politics.
This reality, I hope, to find in more war films and hoping furthermore to find it in "Flags of our Fathers". More broadly I don't feel like comedies, horrors, drama's, thrillers or manga's. I feel like something real. Something tangible to a piece of history and to ourselves as animals of Earth, that do and will get caught up in war that is as evident to us now as as it was when we first started out, creationist or evolutionist speaking. War - as a part of us as humans and a part of our life.
Do you like war films?
Or do you dislike war films?
(Neither is right or wrong and is generally contingent upon our mood.)
Next review - Flags of our Fathers
Featuring two Aussie actors plus a plethora of well-known types in Hollywood, Smokin Aces is your latest big action film from Joe Carnahan, the director behind the gritty "Narc".
[ Click here to read more ]
Reading the Sunday paper today I was shocked to learn about a documentary that not only opposes Al Gores famous An Inconvenient Truth (AIT) but tries to wholeheartedly refute it. It's called The Great Global Warming Swindle (TGGWS) and likely has as many staunch partisan supporters from the other end of the spectrum as does AIT.
Now, I'm no scientist (though have spent time in a lab for academic research on rats) but clearly I'm just caught up in the massive groundswell that has become a major issue quite recently. I've seen the photos of pre-existing waterfalls, rainforests and the statistics on an incline of termperature and all the rest Gore has to offer - but what I can't say is that this has been caused from a single, direct result of environmental pollution that humans are causing and nothing else besides. Consequently from his argument, I'm taking his words as an authority to which seem reasonable enough and also quite believable to an extent
[ Click here to read more ]
Like the show, love the show, don't really care or even worse - see the potenial in it, but regrettably understand the short-term formula it inherently has?
[ Click here to read more ]
Now approaching the holidays where the joy of parlaying the kids off to someone elses responsiblity (school) is closely coming to an end the question begs, how to entertain them before they break something while under your responsiblity? Sure they can entertain themselves infrequently or play at their friends but inevitably there will be times when they or you will need a 2 hour timeout with some decent movies. So, I've compiled a list of good films to see at the cinemas throughout the Christmas break.
[ Click here to read more ]
The counter-culture 'mockumentary' of the fictional character Borat and title of the same name (being 'Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan') is intended for a generation X and Y audience yet tickles the funny-bone of a wider spectrum through a series of skits or comedy sketches. These sketches essentially make up a narrative which in turn loosely configures a plot to be based around. Though, there is enough time to inclusively parody religion, race and gender and anything else considered a culturally sensitive area. That is to say they are extremely politically incorrect and moderately offensive. However, politically both sides will have something to laugh at - either for or against Borat. And in which, this is where the comedy strongly succeeds in being funny for various reasons: one being the laughs at the central character and laughs with the central character making it hilarious
[ Click here to read more ]
The third and final X-Men film of the trilogy (following X-Men and X2) lives up to its namesake of being climatic and comprehensively conclusive. For a start, one of the key members is presumedly killed off in roughly the first 30 minutes! Then, two others die while another few lose their mutant abilities entirely, reducing them to boring old homo sapiens (just like the rest of us). But, the new director Brett Ratner does a commendable job taking over from Bryan Singer who elevated the series initially and rounds out a trilogy that has style and substance (unlike Fantastic Four) a worthwhile story (unlike The Avengers), altogether with an intriguing plot with cooler characters than Spiderman. Oh and did I mention it's much more fresh and entertaining than Superman?
[ Click here to read more ]
In a match that rivals Jordan vs Bird, Twain vs Dickens, Marc Antony vs Julius Caesar, Hitler vs Churchill, or even a Pacino vs De Niro; we're seeing the likes of the latin floosy from "Desperate Housewives" be paired with the black superstar who flooses herself between film and music entertainment. These two have recently revealed they will be starring in roles from an adaption of Sarah Waters book, "Tipping the Velvet". Yet, these two aren't pairing off in a duel or contest for spotlight focus, flipping their hair, pouting or looking their desirable selves, this match-up will be one of compassion where each plays a lover to the other.
[ Click here to read more ]
|
|
|
Comments (7)
Add Comments
Read More
Comment by Justin
on what is Asexuality?
Here's my question, does it take another asexual person to truly understand what it is to be asexual? And furthermore, can only asexuals be romantically involved with each other or live a life with another truly free of sex?